[Xmca-l] Re: A supplement to David's reflection on Translatability

Sat Jan 2 09:32:31 PST 2016

No, ethics require continual evaluation.

Best,
Huw

On 2 January 2016 at 17:14, Greg Thompson <greg.a.thompson@gmail.com> wrote:

> Huw,
> Aren't ethics by definition normalizing?
> Maybe we mean something different by this term?
> -greg
>
> On Sat, Jan 2, 2016 at 10:08 AM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Well, I'm not sure that this is what Larry's intent was, but it does have
> > obvious relevance.
> >
> > It seems to me that one can "escape" normalisation, if one is ethical.
> > Ethics are what defines a profession.  Without ethics we are merely guns
> > for hire.
> >
> > Best,
> > Huw
> >
> >
> > On 2 January 2016 at 16:57, Greg Thompson <greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Yes, I see the contradiction there. I had the same reaction when I
> first
> > > heard MS say it in his Language in Culture seminar (MS is not afraid to
> > > repeat himself, indeed, in his short manuscript on Abe Lincoln, he
> notes
> > > that the Gettysburg address had a long history in Abe's mouth and among
> > his
> > > friends prior to being said in its canonical version).
> > >
> > > If I may give the sympathetic reading, one might make the
> anthropological
> > > argument that one must fully inhabit an oppressive regime in order to
> > > understand it. Thus, using his Wizard of Oz metaphor, we might say that
> > the
> > > position that MS is inhabiting is simultaneously Toto and the Wizard.
> > >
> > > I think that this can provide the seeds of revolutionary action by
> > exposing
> > > the workings of power to critique by others who can see those
> > > inner-workings but without having to fully participate in them.
> > >
> > > [and perhaps this goes back to an older question I have about
> > understanding
> > > a system from the "inside" as opposed to from the "outside" - or
> perhaps
> > in
> > > a more Gadamerian sense we might just speak about these as two
> different
> > > horizons of understanding the system?].
> > >
> > > -greg
> > >
> > > On Sat, Jan 2, 2016 at 9:34 AM, Martin John Packer <
> > > mpacker@uniandes.edu.co>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > No, my point was that one the one hand we have a call to be
> > > > "citizen-scientists" in the face of oppression, while on the other
> hand
> > > we
> > > > have a confession that although the university is "at the highest
> > > pinnacle
> > > > of what you might call the oppressive regime" grading will continue
> as
> > > > usual.
> > > >
> > > > If we can't change the very institution we work in, what kind of
> > > > citizen-scientists are we?
> > > >
> > > > Martin
> > > >
> > > > On Jan 2, 2016, at 11:10 AM, Greg Thompson <
> greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Martin,
> > > > > I'm not clear on what the expectation was that the speakers were
> > > setting
> > > > up?
> > > > > To pull back the curtain to reveal the role that language plays in
> > > social
> > > > > stratification?
> > > > > You don't suppose that this can be found elsewhere in their work?
> > > > ("their"
> > > > > in the generic sense of "linguistic anthropologists' work").
> > > > > Seems a tall order to fill in a single conversation between just
> two
> > > > people.
> > > > > -greg
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, Jan 2, 2016 at 6:52 AM, Martin John Packer <
> > > > mpacker@uniandes.edu.co>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >>> Its only disappointing if you thought that anything else could
> come
> > > out
> > > > >> of
> > > > >>> it.   Note that this was uttered in the context of ethics.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Best, Huw
> > > > >>
> > > > >> But the speakers themselves set up this expectation! Here are the
> > > > >> remaining remarks:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> MS: Yes, exactly. Indeed there are norms even of these other
> > > components,
> > > > >> these non-denotational components as we were saying. They're
> > > understood
> > > > in
> > > > >> terms of a folk system of enrigisterment, but there's lots of
> other
> > > > >> variation as well that people are actually behaving in terms of
> and
> > > > working
> > > > >> in terms of. But this one particular, massively complex system -
> to
> > > > which
> > > > >> indeed the aspiration of working under the umbrella of
> > superdiversity
> > > > >> responds - is indeed a complex one in which people confuse
> standard
> > > > >> register with normativity in the first place, and they confuse
> > > language
> > > > >> with denotational structure. So all of these sorts of things that
> > > we've
> > > > >> taken decades and decades to pull apart, at least so that they
> > become
> > > > >> visible to us as students of languaging, as it were get collapsed
> > into
> > > > one.
> > > > >> And most importantly and - as you pointed out - most tellingly,
> they
> > > > become
> > > > >> instruments of oppression and stratification.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> JB: At the individual level.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> MS: At the individual level, through various kinds of
> > > institutionalized
> > > > >> forms so that you are summoned as a citizen-scientist to say:
> 'Where
> > > do
> > > > I
> > > > >> stand on using my knowledge to, as it were, maybe illuminate
> people,
> > > > maybe
> > > > >> reveal what's going on.'
> > > > >>
> > > > >> JB: At least show what's going on. That's the least we can do.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> MS: That's the least we can do. There is a wonderful scene in the
> > 1939
> > > > >> Hollywood movie 'The Wizard of Oz' in which...
> > > > >>
> > > > >> JB: 'The witch is dead'
> > > > >>
> > > > >> MS: no no it's not that the witch is dead
> > > > >>
> > > > >> JB: ...a hit a few weeks ago when Margaret Thatcher died
> > > > >>
> > > > >> MS: that's a different story! Leave the Baroness out of this...
> > there
> > > > is a
> > > > >> wonderful scene in which Toto - the little dog of Dorothy - pulls
> > > back a
> > > > >> curtain when you see the mountebank, the snake-oil salesman,
> working
> > > the
> > > > >> levers of the machine that's running this thing which supports
> > > > [purports?]
> > > > >> to be Oz. And we can certainly try to be that little Toto.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> JB: So on that note thank you very very much, Michael.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> MS: Well it's always a pleasure to talk to you guys!
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Jan 1, 2016, at 11:38 PM, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> On 2 January 2016 at 03:04, Martin John Packer <
> > > > mpacker@uniandes.edu.co>
> > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> It's a little disappointing that they oppressed their own
> > > conversation
> > > > >> at
> > > > >>>> the following point, no?
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Martin
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> MS [Michael Silverstein]:  I say to my students all the time:
> 'now
> > > > that
> > > > >>>> I've revealed to you the entire massive machinery of
> > > socio-linguistic
> > > > >>>> oppression, of stratification around the standard and so on,
> that
> > > will
> > > > >> not
> > > > >>>> stop me from correcting your papers because my institution is at
> > the
> > > > >>>> highest pinnacle of what you might call the oppressive regime'.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> JB [Jan Blommaert]: Absolutely. And at the same time - maybe
> this
> > > > could
> > > > >> be
> > > > >>>> a useful conclusion of this conversation - at the same time it
> > > proves
> > > > >> also
> > > > >>>> that there is no absence of norms, there is no shortage of norms
> > > even
> > > > >> in a
> > > > >>>> sociocultural organization of language. Normativity is
> everywhere.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> On Jan 1, 2016, at 9:16 PM, Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>> I decided to start a new thread because I did not want to shift
> > the
> > > > >>>> focus that David’s thread opened up on myth busting.
> > > > >>>>> However, I do want to share a paper on the topic of
> > translatability
> > > > and
> > > > >>>> the uses of standardization that does overlap somewhat with the
> > > other
> > > > >>>> thread.
> > > > >>>>> The format is a conversation between Michael Silverstein, Jef
> Van
> > > de
> > > > >> Aa,
> > > > >>>> and Jan Blommaert.
> > > > >>>>> Entering this conversation exploring the notion of
> > translatability
> > > > as a
> > > > >>>> culturally bound philosophical construct may have some relevance
> > for
> > > > the
> > > > >>>> other thread ongoing.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Sent from Mail for Windows 10
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> <NOVEMBER 4 2014 390 BLOMMAERT and
> > > > Silverstein_in_conversation.pdf>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> > > > > Assistant Professor
> > > > > Department of Anthropology
> > > > > 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
> > > > > Brigham Young University
> > > > > Provo, UT 84602
> > > > > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> > > Assistant Professor
> > > Department of Anthropology
> > > 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
> > > Brigham Young University
> > > Provo, UT 84602
> > > http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> Assistant Professor
> Department of Anthropology
> 880 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
> Brigham Young University
> Provo, UT 84602
> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
>